Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T15:49:29.696Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transparency in the WTO's Decision-Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2014

PANAGIOTIS DELIMATSIS
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In almost 20 years of existence, the World Trade Organization (WTO) has managed to be at the forefront of public discussions on international organizations (IOs). Transparency in the WTO decision-making has been on the agenda of the multilateral trading system for several years. Pressures from developing countries, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the civil society in particular have led to significant improvements towards more openness and participation in the WTO decision-making. This article posits the WTO within the current debates about more institutional transparency in IOs. It discusses the current features of good governance in the WTO decision-making and the consensus rule in particular, in an attempt to identify the pros and cons of this voting tradition in a modern IO. It also discusses the recent selection of the new WTO Director-General. A central insight of the paper is that input and output transparency of the WTO could be further enhanced by increased, managed participation of NGOs. As the WTO is gradually becoming a genuine IO in terms of membership and gets involved in global discussions relating to finance, climate change, or poverty eradication, public scrutiny will only increase and thus improved governance is an irreversible process. However, divergences in the views of WTO Members as to the proper scope of WTO input and output transparency will most probably lead to extended negotiations. Some thoughts about the future prospects of and possible avenues for the WTO system are also identified.

Keywords

good governancelegitimacynon-governmental organizations (NGOs)transparencyWorld Trade Organization (WTO)
Type
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PRACTICE
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 701 - 726
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 There is relatively detailed coverage of the WTO DG selection process at the WTO website <http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/dg_e/dg_selection_process_e.htm>.

2 WTO, ‘Procedures for the Appointment of Directors-General adopted by the General Council’, adopted 10 December 2002, WT/L/509 (hereinafter ‘the 2002 DG selection procedures’).

3 See Pierson, P., ‘Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics’, (2000) 94 (2)The American Political Science Review 251CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 See Koskenniemi, M., ‘The Politics of International Law – 20 Years Later’, (2009) 20 (1)EJIL 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Art. XVI:1 of the WTO Agreement in fact requires WTO members to do exactly that, i.e. follow the GATT tradition.

6 See Fisher, E., ‘Transparency and Administrative Law: A Critical Evaluation’, (2010) 63 (1)Current Legal Problems 272CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 275.

7 On the discussion about the limits of transparency that the revelations of Mr Edward Snowden relating to the spy program of the US National Security Agency (NSA) provoked, see M. Sherer, ‘The Geeks who Leak’, TIME Magazine, 24 June 2013.

8 For this, see Ehlermann, C. D. and Ehring, L., ‘Decision-Making in the World Trade Organization – Is the Consensus Practice of the World Trade Organization Adequate for Making, Revising and Implementing Rules on International Trade?’, (2005) 8 (1)Journal of International Economic Law 51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Among many others, see Buchanan, A. and Keohane, R. O., ‘The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions’, (2006) 20 Ethics and International Affairs 405CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 See Kuijper, P. J., ‘The Law of GATT as a Special Field of International Law’, (1994) Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 227Google Scholar.

11 Delimatsis, P., ‘The Fragmentation of International Trade Law’, (2011) 45 (1)Journal of World Trade 87Google Scholar.

12 See Appellate Body Report, United States-Continued Existence and Application of Zeroing Methodology, (4 February 2009) AB-2008-11, WT/DS350/AB/R, at [267]-[268]; also Appellate Body Report, China-Measures Affecting Trade Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Products, (12 August 2009) AB-2009-3, WT/DS363/R at [396].

13 H. Horn, P. Mavroidis, and E. N. Wijkström, ‘In the Shadow of the DSU: Addressing Specific Trade Concerns in the WTO SPS and TBT Committees’, IFN Working Paper No. 960 (8 March 2013).

14 For an excellent review of the role of power in international law, see Steinberg, R. and Zasloff, J., ‘Power and International Law’, (2006) 100 (1)AJIL 64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 See R. Howse, ‘The Most Dangerous Branch? The WTO Appellate Body Jurisprudence on the Nature and Limits of the Judicial Power’, in T. Cottier and P. Mavroidis (eds.), The Role of the Judge in International Trade Regulation (2001).

16 See WTO, ‘The World Trade Report 2013: Factors Shaping the Future of World Trade’ (2013) at 284.

17 See R. Keohane and J. Nye, Jr., ‘The Club Model of Multilateral Cooperation and the World Trade Organization: Problems of Democratic Legitimacy’, The John F. Kennedy School of Government – Visions of Governance in the 21st Century, Working Paper No. 4 (using the term of Nobel laureate Herbert Simon).

18 See Howse, R., ‘From Politics to Tecnocracy – And Back Again: The Fate of the Multilateral Trading Regime’, (2002) 96 AJIL 94CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 E. Benvenisti and G. Downs, ‘The Empire's New Clothes: Political Economy and the Fragmentation of International Law’, Global Administrative Law Working Paper 2007/6. In a similar vein, it was submitted that international law, more generally, is limited by the configurations of state interests and the distribution of state power. See J. Goldsmith and E. Posner, The Limits of International Law (2005).

20 See also Franck, T., ‘The Power of Legitimacy and the Legitimacy of Power: International Law in an Age of Power Disequilibrium’, (2006) 100 (1)AJIL 88CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 90.

21 Krisch, N., ‘International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order’, (2005) 16 (3)EJIL 369CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 379.

22 See Kennedy, D., ‘The Mystery of Global Governance’ in Dunoff, J. and Trachtman, J. (eds.), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance (2009), 37CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 55. Also Goldstein, J. et al., ‘Introduction: Legalization and World Politics’, (2000) 54 (3)International Organization 385CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 A. Bianchi, ‘On Power and Illusion: The Concept of Transparency in International Law’, in A. Bianchi and A. Peters (eds.), Transparency in International Law (2013). This may not be applicable to all IOs across the board. See Steven Ratner's contribution in the same edited volume.

24 In this case, institutional transparency can be regarded as a subsidy to those parties who are unable to obtain certain pieces of information.

25 An example would be the co-operation between the WTO and ISO or the fact that various intergovernmental bodies have an observer status at the WTO: See <http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/igo_obs_e.htm>.

26 See Kingsbury, B., ‘The Concept of “Law” in Global Administrative Law’, (2009) 20 EJIL 23CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 49.

27 For instance, Grant and Keohane find that the WTO has been very successful in this respect, and this increases the accountability of the institution: Grant, R. and Keohane, R., ‘Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics’, (2005) 99 (1)American Political Science Review 29CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 39.

28 The importance of technocracy as a source of legitimacy was underlined by Max Weber. See Hurd, I., ‘Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics’, (1999) 53 International Organization, 379CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 388.

29 See Kingsbury, B.; Krisch, N., and Stewart, R., ‘The Emergence of Global Administrative Law’, (2005) 68 (3)Law and Contemporary Problems 15Google Scholar.

30 See the 2005 World Summit Outcome, whereby developing countries acknowledged that ‘good governance and the rule of law at the national and international levels are essential for sustained economic growth, sustainable development and the eradication of poverty and hunger’: General Assembly, ‘Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly: 2005 World Summit Outcome’, UN Doc. A/RES/60/1 (24 October 2005) [11].

31 See Stasavage, D., ‘Transparency in Domestic and International Bargaining’, (2004) 58 International Organization 667CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 668. See also Baldwin, R., ‘Trade Negotiations within the GATT/WTO Framework: A Survey of Successes and Failures’, (2009) 31 Journal of Policy Modeling 515CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 A-. M. Slaughter, A New World Order (2004) 220.

33 Morgan, J. and Várdy, F., ‘Mixed Motives and the Optimal Size of Voting Bodies’, (2012) 120 (5)Journal of Political Economy 986CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 1009.

34 Arts. VIII:1 and V:1 WTOA, respectively.

35 Compare the Uruguay Round Declaration on the Contribution of the World Trade Organization to Achieving Greater Coherence in Global Economic Policymaking (‘The Coherence Mandate’), 1994; also M. Auboin, ‘Fulfilling the Marrakesh Mandate on Coherence: Ten Years of Cooperation Between the WTO, IMF and World Bank’, WTO Discussion Paper No. 13, 2007.

36 See WTO, ‘Agreements Between the WTO and the IMF and the World Bank’, Decision Adopted by the General Council at its Meeting on 7, 8 and 13 November 1996, WT/L/194 (18 November 1996).

37 Art. V:2 WTOA.

38 WTO, ‘Guidelines for Arrangements with on Relations with Non-Governmental Organizations’, WT/L/162 (23 July 1996).

39 Esty, D., ‘The World Trade Organization's Legitimacy Crisis’, (2002) 1 World Trade Review 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Dunoff, J., ‘Public Participation in the Trade Regime: Of Litigation, Frustration, Agitation and Legitimation’, (2004) 56 Rutgers Law Review 961Google Scholar at 970.

40 Cottier, T., ‘Preparing for Structural Reform in the WTO’, (2007) 10 Journal of International Economic Law 497CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 503.

41 See Charnovitz, S., ‘The WTO and Cosmopolitics’ in Petersmann, E. U. (ed.), Reforming the World Trading System – Legitimacy, Efficiency, and Democratic Governance (2005) 438Google Scholar at 444.

42 See, e.g., WTO General Council, ‘Minutes of Meeting Held on 27 July 2011’, WT/GC/M/132 (21 September 2011) [68ff].

43 However, all official WTO documents shall be unrestricted. See WTO, ‘Procedures for the Circulation and Derestriction of WTO Documents’, WT/L/452 (16 May 2002).

44 Art. XII WTOA.

45 Art. IX WTOA and the accompanying footnote.

46 See the Preamble of the WTOA.

47 However, the rules of procedure for the MC in theory allow such QM voting. See WTO, ‘Rules of Procedure for Sessions of the Ministerial Conference and Meetings of the General Council’, WT/L/161 (25 July 1996), Rule 29 (MC) and Rule 33 (GC).

48 See, e.g., WTO General Council, ‘Minutes of Meeting Held on 17 and 19 July 2000’, WT/GC/M/57 (14 September 2000) [134] (‘There was also a strong commitment of the Members to reaffirm the existing practice of taking decisions by consensus’).

49 WTO Trade Negotiations Committee, ‘Statement by the Chairman of the General Council’, TN/C/1 (4 February 2002).

50 See P. Low, ‘WTO Decision-Making for the Future’, WTO Staff Working Paper ERSD-2011–05, (May 2011).

51 See Steinberg, R., ‘In the Shadow of Law or Power? Consensus-Based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO’, (2002) 56 (2)International Organization 339CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 344.

52 Art. IX:1 WTOA.

53 See Alvarez-Jiménez, A., ‘Improvements to the WTO Decision-Making Process: Lessons from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank’, in Steger, D. (ed.), Redesigning the World Trade Organization for the Twenty-First Century (2009) 91Google Scholar at 95.

54 Blackhurst, R. and Hartridge, D., ‘Improving the Capacity of WTO Institutions to Fulfill their Mandate’, (2004) 7 (3)Journal of International Economic Law 705CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 For the sake of comparison, in the MC in Singapore only 34 members participated in the consultative process that led to the Ministerial Declaration. See WTO, ‘World Trade Report 2007 – Six Decades of Multilateral Trade Co-operation: What Have We Learnt?’ (2007) at 324.

56 See C. D. Birkbeck and M. Harbourd, ‘Developing Country Coalitions in the WTO: Strategies for Improving the Influence of the WTO's Weakest and Poorest Members’, GEG Working Paper 2011/63 (July 2011).

57 Narlikar, A. and Odell, J., ‘The Strict Distributive Strategy for a Bargaining Coalition: The Like Minded Group in the World Trade Organization, 1998–2001’ in Odell, J. (ed.), Negotiating Trade: Developing Countries in the WTO and NAFTA (2006), at 115–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; also Diego-Fernandez, M., ‘Trade Negotiations Make Strange Bedfellows’, (2008) 7 (2)World Trade Review 423CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 431.

58 See da Motta Veiga, P., ‘Brazil and the G-20 Group of Developing Countries’ in Gallagher, P., Low, P., and Stoler, A. (eds.), Managing the Challenges of WTO Participation: 45 Case Studies (2005), at 109CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

59 See also P. Sutherland et al., The Future of the WTO – Addressing Institutional Challenges in the New Millenium (the ‘Sutherland Report’), 2004, at 72; also M. Elsig, ‘WTO Decision-Making: Can We Get a Little Help from the Secretariat and the Critical Mass?’, in Steger (ed.), supra note 53, 67, at 72.

60 The Warwick Commission, The Multilateral Trade Regime: Which Way Forward? (2007).

61 See Collins-Williams, T. and Wolfe, R., ‘Transparency as a Trade Policy Tool: The WTO's Cloudy Windows’, (2010) 9 (4)World Trade Review 551CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 552. See also The Report of the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade convened by the WTO DG Pascal Lamy, ‘The Future of Trade: The Challenges of Convergence’ (24 April 2013), at 29.

62 In the context of the EU, see Case C-41/00 P, Interporc Im- und Export GmbH v. Commission of the European Communities [2003] ECR I-2125 at [39]. See also Joined Cases C-39/05 P and C-52/05, Sweden and Turco v. Council of the European Union [2008] ECR I-4723 at [59]. Strong statements with regard to the requirements of openness in the EU decision-making have been made. See, e.g., Regulation 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, OJ L 145 [2001] 43, recitals 2, 6 and 11. The new Art. 15 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides that the Union's institutions shall be as open and transparent as possible ‘in order to promote good governance and ensure the participation of civil society’. Arts. 10 and 11 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) equally tell about the importance of openness, suggesting that broad consultations with the civil society will ensure policy coherence. See, more generally, Curtin, D., ‘Judging EU Secrecy’, (2012) 2 Cahiers de Droit Européen 459Google Scholar.

63 GATT Decision on Notification Procedures, LT/UR/D-1/5 (15 April 1994).

64 This is probably a trait of all IOs. See M. Donaldson and B. Kingsbury, ‘Power and the Public: The Nature and Effects of Formal Transparency Policies in Global Governance Institutions’, in Bianchi and Peters, supra note 23, 502 at 517.

65 Goldstein, J. and Martin, L., ‘Legalization, Trade Liberalization, and Domestic Politics: A Cautionary Note’, (2000) 54 (3)International Organization 603CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 614.

66 See Doha Declaration, adopted 14 November 2001, WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1 (20 November 2001) at [10] and [49].

67 Abbott, K.et al., ‘The Concept of Legalization’, (2000) 54 (3)International Organization 401CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 405.

68 See R. Howse, ‘How to Begin to Think About the “Democratic Deficit” at the WTO’, in S. Griller (ed.), International Economic Governance and Non-Economic Concerns – New Challenges for the International Legal Order (2003). In the US, the so-called ‘fast-track’ authority has been criticized by various circles.

69 See Bonzon, Y. et al., ‘Reflections on Modes of Decision-Making in the World Trade Organization’, in Cottier, T. and Delimatsis, P. (eds.), The Prospects of International Trade Regulation – From Fragmentation to Coherence (2011), 103CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 110.

70 See Buchanan and Keohane, supra note 9 at 405.

71 See Sutherland Report, supra note 59, at 64. In favour of the single undertaking approach, see Wolfe, R., ‘The WTO Single Undertaking as Negotiating Technique and Constitutive Metaphor’, (2009) 12 (4)Journal of International Economic Law 835CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a subtler approach, see Rolland, S., ‘Redesigning the Negotiating Process at the WTO’, (2010) 13 (1)Journal of International Economic Law 65CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72 See M. Foltea, International Organizations in WTO Dispute Settlement (2012).

73 See Cottier, T. and Takenoshita, S., ‘The Balance of Power in WTO Decision-Making: Towards Weighted Voting in Legislative Response’, (2003) 2 Aussenwirtschaft 171Google Scholar; also Tijmes-Lhl, J., ‘Consensus and Majority Voting in the WTO’, (2009) 8 (3)World Trade Review 417CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

74 This is the case with the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) currently negotiated by over 20 WTO Members. Importantly, Brazil and India do not participate in the negotiations, and China only recently asked to join. The Bali Ministerial Declaration seems to tolerate such initiatives. See WTO, ‘Bali Ministerial Declaration’ WT/MIN(13)/DEC (11 December 2013) at [1.12].

75 See Maggi, G. and Morelli, M., ‘Self-Enforcing Voting in International Organizations’, (2006) 96 (4)American Economic Review 1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

76 Available at <http://www.ipu.org/splz-e/trade08/rules.pdf>.

77 See Rommetvedt, H., ‘The Institutionalization of a Parliamentary Dimension of an Intergovernmental Organization: The WTO’, (2011) 10 World Trade Review 423CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78 Moravcsik, A., ‘Is there a “Democratic Deficit” in World Politics? A Framework for Analysis’, (2004) 39 (2)Government and Opposition 336CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

79 Claims concerning substantive unfairness mainly relate to the WTO dispute settlement mechanism.

80 See Lang, A. and Scott, J., ‘The Hidden World of WTO Governance’, (2009) 20 (3)EJIL 575CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 590.

81 For some early complaints, see WTO, ‘Memorandum on the Need to Improve Internal Transparency and Participation in the WTO’, (2003) available at <http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=‘wto%20decision-making%20and%20internal%20transparency'%2C&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CFcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.twnside.org.sg%2Ftitle2%2Fpar%2FMEMORANDUM_ON_THE_NEED_TO_IMPROVE_IT_Final_version.doc&ei=BpDQT8_WJ8iW-waUnJSbDA&usg=AFQjCNHDr-M9TByUrAM0TSSwdgDp2Bz9tw>.

82 See Pedersen, P., ‘The WTO Decision-Making Process and Internal Transparency’, (2006) 5 (1)World Trade Review 103CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 107.

83 See Appellate Body Report, United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, (12 October 1988) AB-1998–4, WT/DS58/AB/R at [180–183]; and Appellate Body Report, European Communities-Selected Customs Matters, (13 November 2006) AB-2006–4, WT/DS315/AB/R at [302].

84 See also Shany, Y., ‘Toward a General Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in International Law?’, (2005) 16 (5)EJIL 907CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón in Case C-280/11 P, Council of the European Union v Access Info Europe [2013].

85 See J. Helmer and R. Wolfe, ‘Trade Policy Begins at Home: Information and Consultation in the Trade Policy Process’, 2007 available at <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1365111≥.

86 Compare the similar argumentation used by the EU General Court: Case T-233/09, Access Info Europe v. Council of the European Union [2011] ECR II-1073 at [56ff].

87 See also Doha Declaration, supra 66, at [10].

88 See D. Esty, Greening the GATT: Trade, Environment, and the Future (1994) at 27–8 (discussing the role of environmental NGOs in the NAFTA).

89 Webcasting of such meetings with the collection of feedback taking place in another room or electronically is also a possibility.

90 See Esty, D., ‘Linkages and Governance: NGOs at the World Trade Organization’, (1998) 19 (3)University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 709Google Scholar, at 716.

91 See A. Kuper, Democracy Beyond Borders – Justice and Representation in Global Institutions (2004) at 164–5.

92 See Blackhurst, R., ‘The Role of the Director-General and the Secretariat’, in Narlikar, A., Daunton, M., and Stern, R. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the World Trade Organization (2012) 141Google Scholar, at 146.

93 Dunoff, J., ‘The WTO in Transition: Of Constituents, Competence and Coherence’, (2001) 33 George Washington International Law Review 979Google Scholar.

94 See Esty, D. and Geradin, D., ‘Regulatory Co-Opetition’, (2000) Journal of International Economic Law 235Google Scholar at 253.

95 See J. Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society (1981) at 286–7.

96 See Roberts, A. and Sivakumaran, S., ‘Lawmaking by Non-state Actors: Engaging Armed Groups in the Creation of International Humanitarian Law’, (2012) 37 (1)Yale Journal of International Law 108Google Scholar.

97 See Stasavage, supra note 31, at 680.

98 Piewitt, M., ‘Participatory Governance in the WTO: How Inclusive Is Global Civil Society?’, (2010) 44 (2)Journal of World Trade 467Google Scholar at 485. Interestingly, Piewitt suggests that there is a persistent North–South divide in global civil society in the WTO and a dominance of the business sector.

99 See, e.g., J. Politi, A. Thomson, and J. Leahy, ‘Brazil in Tight Race with Mexico to Head WTO’, Financial Times (6 May 2013). Kenya, which nominated a candidate, also complained formally about a procedural matter relating to the confidential consultations. See ICTSD, ‘Candidate Field Narrows for WTO Director-General's Race’, (2013) 17(3) Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest.

100 Interestingly, the term ‘consensus’ is mentioned ten times in the adopted procedures: See WTO, supra note 2.

101 See WTO, supra note 2, para. 8. The candidates were: Azevêdo (Brazil); Blanco (Mexico); González (Costa Rica); Kyerematen (Ghana); Mohamed (Kenya); Pangestu (Indonesia); Hindawi (Jordan); Groser (New Zealand); and Bark (South Korea).

102 See WTO General Council, ‘Minutes of Meeting Held in the Centre William Rappard on 29–31 January 2013’, WT/GC/M/142 (16 May 2013).

103 See WTO, supra note 2 at [17–18]. Also WTO, ‘Appointment of the next Director-General – Further Progress: Informal General Council Meeting at the Level of Heads of Delegations’, Statement by the Chairman, JOB/GC/39, (19 March 2013).

104 See WTO, supra note 2 at [17].

105 See ICTSD, ‘WTO Members Choose Brazil's Azevêdo as Next Director-General’ (2013) 2(2) Bridges Africa Review.

106 See, e.g., Hoekman, B. and Mavroidis, P. (eds.), Race for the WTO Director-General job – Seven Candidates Speak (2013)Google Scholar; also Meléndez-Ortiz, R. (ed.), Global Challenges and the Future of the WTO (2013)Google Scholar.

107 See Bagwell, K. and Staiger, R., The Economics of the World Trading System (2002), 39Google Scholar.

108 See Abbott, K. and Snidal, D., ‘Why States Act through Formal International Organizations’, (1998) 42 (1)Journal of International Conflict Resolution 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Also J. Alvarez, International Organizations as Law-Makers (2005) at 338 ff.

109 See Fisher, supra note 6 at 276.

110 See Hirschman, A., ‘Exit, Voice and the State’, (1978) 31 (1)World Politics 90CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 106.

111 See Hocking, B., ‘Changing the Terms of Trade Policy Making: From the “Club” to the “Multistakeholder” Model’, (2004) 3 World Trade Review 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

112 See, e.g., the reforms that accompanied the EU Better Regulation Initiative.

113 See Keohane, R., Macedo, S., and Moravcsik, A., ‘Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism’, (2009) 63 International Organization 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 23.

114 For a more nuanced view, see Pauwelyn, J., ‘The Transformation of World Trade’, (2005) 104 Michigan Law Review 1Google Scholar, at 34.

115 Trachtman, J., ‘The Constitutions of the WTO’, (2006) 17 EJIL 623CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 638.

116 Having said this, one should refer to recent evidence suggesting that the GATT/WTO managed to spur on the trade of developing economies. See Goldstein, J., Rivers, D., and Tomz, M., ‘Institutions in International Relations: Understanding the Effects of the GATT and the WTO on World Trade’, (2007) 61 International Organization 37CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 57.

117 See J. Bacchus, ‘A Few Thoughts on Legitimacy, Democracy, and the WTO’, in Petersmann, supra note 41, 429 at 430.

118 Here I refer particularly to those countries which are at the outskirts of the developing world, with few possibilities of affecting terms of trade.